i do not want to miss out on good shots of my playing kids;
with my canon S95 i have blurred pics , or am far too late because slow AF.
I was looking at a m43 cam with a zuiko 45mm f1.8.
Would this be fast enough to capture moving objects??
I am afraid of getting disappointed and ending up with pretty much thesame as the S95.
On the other hand , i might keep the S95 as an always with me cam , and add a Pentax K-R for action shots
What do you think guys ?

I've had good results with my om-d and 45/1.8, I think it's a great combo. If you're shooting outside in good light, you should do just fine. Indoors, you might want to add a bounced flash just to keep the shutter speeds up without bumping up the iso.

Hi with the EM5 you can go upto 6400 iso and get A3 sized prints without noise no problem, The trouble with using flash you get harsh lighting and hard ugly shadows, just put your iso on auto upto 6400 and in shutter priority at around 1/250 to 1/400 and you should be fine.

There tends to be two issues with blurred pics of kids in motion: 1) slow shutter speed, and 2) slow auto focus.

Any idea how fast your shutter speeds have been? The pic you posted is at 1/100 second. Notice his feet are blurry. The rest of his body is mainly stationary. 1/100 is a minimum you need to capture quick kids. I would actually want to get a bit faster than that, if possible. Outdoors it shouldn't be an issue. You didn't say, but are your pictures mainly inside?

Are you shooting indoors at the long end of the S95's zoom? If so, that's f/4.5. The 45/1.8 can be at f/1.8 at the long end. That's about 2 2/3 stop faster, or more than 4X the light let in. You can also add more light with flash.

Both of the items above impact shutter speed.

Your other issue is auto focus speed. The 45/1.8 is likely much faster to focus than an S95. I've not had an S95, but I've used other Canon powershots. The Pentax is likely to AF just as fast as the 45mm lens, but it can also C-AF better than m43. But the issue with shutter speed still remains regardless of which camera you are talking about. In either case, you need fast lenses and good lighting and maybe flash.

If you post some examples with EXIF intact (or list the shutter speeds and ISO and aperture) we can help diagnose. My opinion is you can do it with m43 and the 45mm lens. You might be slightly happier with a DSLR under certain circumstances, but you are also adding extra bulk and weight.

Hi with the EM5 you can go upto 6400 iso and get A3 sized prints without noise no problem, The trouble with using flash you get harsh lighting and hard ugly shadows, just put your iso on auto upto 6400 and in shutter priority at around 1/250 to 1/400 and you should be fine.

Dave

Click to expand...

You only get harsh flash lighting if you use head-on flash. Use a tilt/swivel head, and learn to bounce flash, and the results are beautiful. The one thing about m43 for me, is that many of the cameras are not really big enough to handle a serious flash well. The Panny GH series, G3 and G5 and OMD could, but the Pens and the other Pannys would struggle, both in terms of size and lacking a VF, to handle flash super well. Ned might use flash on Pens, so maybe he could comment further, if he's reading this.

For moving kids no "point and shoots" a la the S95 will suffice. Older m4/3s like E-PL1 or E-PM1 with fast lens (45/1.8 is very good) can work. E-M5 is better. DSLR with fast glass is better still.

I personally like the idea of having an S95 for carry everywhere convenience + a DSLR for getting the shots you need. Or I like the idea of investing all that in to an m4/3s kit. It really depends what your overall priorities are though.

On a cost basis, you can pick up a used Canon 40D, which is a great action cam, for $300 and a new Sigma 30/1.4 for $290 or a used Canon 85/1.8 or 50/1.4 for $300. So basically a camera + fast prime for around $600. If you go with an E-PL1 or M1 + 45/1.8, used, you will be closer to $400. If the $600 is workable I think it would be a no-brainer to go with the DSRL.

m4/3s can certainly capture fast moving kids, but it won't be quite as easy and your keeper rate will not be quite as high vs a DSLR.

Yes... no... maybe. This picture could have been taken with any of the cameras you mentioned. To belabor the point, it is not the camera, it is the photographer...

The issue here is that you need to understand the way your camera works. That means a fundamental understanding of shutter speed / aperture / ISO and the way they interact, ie: all thing equal, a higher shutter speed means you generally need a larger aperture which can in turn be compensated for by higher film speed (ISO)... to a point where IQ may suffer... and all combinations thereof...

So, if you want to freeze motion, you need a higher shutter speed. I'll bet you could have done this with the Canon. You can do it with Mu43, and you can do it with the Pentax.

The bottom line is YOU have to do it.

BTW, nice photo. It is sharp. Parts are blurred. I like the blur in this case. It is an action shot. The movement adds to the composition in this case. MHO

For moving kids no "point and shoots" a la the S95 will suffice....If the $600 is workable I think it would be a no-brainer to go with the DSRL...m4/3s can certainly capture fast moving kids, but it won't be quite as easy and your keeper rate will not be quite as high vs a DSLR.

Click to expand...

+1

I abandoned DSLR's only after I was sure that I wouldn't be photographing the grandkids playing sports anymore. It isn't that :43: can't do it - but the DSLR is better at it.

Used Canikons with fast primes are relatively inexpensive these days. I got very good results with a Nikon 35mm f1.8 and they're going used for @ $140 U.S. A D3100 body refurbished is going for $360 U.S. on B&H.

The lacrosse shots above are good examples of what can be done with :43: gear .

However, for capturing the runner coming home from third base on a suicide squeeze I'd prefer a Nikon D300 with a grip full of AA cells and a 70-200 f2.8 lens . 8 frames per second and the camera can maintain focus from the first shot to the last. Marvelous gear. Also 10 pounds carry weight and around $3000 on hoof . (The point being, and it's simply my personal view not gospel, is that DSLR's are better at action shots than :43: gear).

Links in this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.